this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
254 points (98.5% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5186 readers
1235 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The figures published by Oxfam are particularly stark in France, where the richest 1% emit as much carbon in one year as the poorest 50% in 10 years.

(...)
The income threshold for being among the global top 1% was adjusted by country using purchasing power parity – for example in the United States the threshold would be $140,000, whereas the Kenyan equivalent would be about $40,000.

Stark picture in France

Within-country analyses also painted very stark pictures. For example, in France, the richest 1% emit as much carbon in one year as the poorest 50% in 10 years.

Excluding the carbon associated with his investments, Bernard Arnault, the billionaire founder of Louis Vuitton and richest man in France, has a footprint 1,270 times greater than that of the average Frenchman.

The key message, according to Lawson, was that policy actions must be progressive. "We think that unless governments enact climate policy that is progressive, where you see the people who emit the most being asked to take the biggest sacrifices, then we're never going to get good politics around this," he said.

These measures could include, for example, a tax on flying more than ten times a year, or a tax on non-green investments that is much higher than the tax on green investments.

While the current report focused on carbon linked only to individual consumption, "the personal consumption of the super-rich is dwarfed by emissions resulting from their investments in companies," the report found.

Nor are the wealthy invested in polluting industries at a similar ratio to any given investor -- billionaires are twice as likely to be invested in polluting industries than the average for the Standard & Poor 500, previous Oxfam research has shown.


You can read the report here : Richest 1% emit as much planet-heating pollution as two-thirds of humanity

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] derf82 4 points 11 months ago

Nope. Hell, even if every rich person was American, the US population is over 4% of the global population. So obviously at least 3/4 of us are not part of the global 1%.